SHANKAR Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KARWAR UTTARA KANNADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Land Tribunal, Kumta, granted occupancy rights, on 31.07.1976, in respect of the property in question, in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5. Form No.10 was issued on 09.04.1981. It contained a condition of non -alienation of the property for a period of 15 years. The said property was purchased by the petitioner, on 20.05.1997, from respondent Nos.4 and 5. Mutation entry was certified on 26.06.1997, in favour of the petitioner, showing the acquisition of rights in the property. Respondent No.3 having submitted a proposal on 22.03.1999, to respondent No.2, that the alienation in favour of the petitioner as per the sale deed dated 20.05.1997, is contrary to the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'the PTCL Act'), respondent No.2 registered a case and issued notice. Though the petitioner filed objections and contended that the provisions of the Act are not attracting and though the alienation was made after expiry of the nonalienation period, shown in Form No.10 issued on 09.04.1981, respondent No.2 having declared the sale transaction as null and void and ordered the resumption of the property and its handing over in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5, an appeal was preferred before respondent No.1. The appeal having been dismissed by an order dated 16.08.1999, this writ petition was filed, to quash the orders passed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 vide Annexures 'E' and 'D' respectively.

(2.) SRI .Madanmohan M.Khannur, learned advocate, contended that the impugned orders are arbitrary and illegal and hence, liable to be quashed. He submitted that respondent Nos.1 and 2 have failed to consider the case by keeping in view the decision in MOHAMMED JAFAR and ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA and OTHERS, 2002 ILR(Kar) 4693. He further submitted that the occupancy rights of the property in question having been granted by the Land Tribunal, under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1974, (for short 'the KLR Act') and the property not falling within the ambit of 'Granted Land' as defined under Section 3(1)(b) of the Karnataka Act 2 of 1979, respondent Nos.1 and 2, having no jurisdiction, passed the impugned orders and the same being nullity are liable to quashed.

(3.) SMT .K.Vidyavati, learned AGA, made submissions in support of the impugned orders. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 though served with notice, remained absent.